|
Originally Posted by super_hunt54
(Post 4234516)
Yep, six shooters firing 12 shots without a reload! Marshal Dillion always being faster on the draw even though he made molasses look quick! Fanning a Colt with 1 inch grouping at 50 yards! (that one always gave me a good giggle) Bullets sparking when they hit a car. Cars blowing up when you shoot them in the gas tank! No wonder the majority of Americans know so little about firearms. Hollywood has their heads so full of stupid it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
|
Matt Dillion has been shot a few times in a draw. It should have been more, but then the series wouldn't have lasted 20 years.
I'm a sucker for Gunsmoke. I've watched every rerun about 5-6 times. It's on at supper time, so I always watch it while eating. |
Originally Posted by OldBob47
(Post 4234462)
rafsob,
I'll answer this post anyway. Yes, our forefathers harvested, and probably wounded, much game with the PRB. Likewise, the Native Americans with the arms available to them did the same thing. Google "Megafauna Extinctions". You know what? The Native Americans couldn't afford nostalgia, since they needed arms not only to hunt, but to defend themselves from the murderous savages who had invaded the continent. So, whenever they got the chance to upgrade, they did, going to smoothbore arms, then rifled arms, then to repeaters. I just seriously doubt that they sat around the campfire bemoaning the abandonment of the bow and arrow and the spear. At some point, I think we have to ask ourselves if our slavish devotion to some aspect of outdated technology is diminishing our sport, and ourselves. It's a conversation we need to have, realizing that people may disagree on the answer. Better to disagree than to avoid the question. OldBob |
Originally Posted by rafsob
(Post 4234559)
?????????????????????????? Man, what were you smoking when you wrote this?????
It seems like he wants everybody to use a CF rifle with a scope. Otherwise, we'd be living in the past with any muzzleloader. I guess we don't need a muzzy, or bow season anymore. You seen my box of .338 magnums? |
Originally Posted by ronlaughlin
(Post 4234411)
The Lewis & Clark expedition learned the hard way that their prb was inadequate for killing Grizzly.
I believe this is a fact. Me, i have no experience with prb, and have no opinion of prb. I don't believe i am knocking a bullet choice, but i do believe i am ignorant. What i wrote may not be relevant, or nice, but i couldn't find the fishing section. If you are trying to lighten up this subject, it didn't work sir!!! |
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234561)
It seems like he wants everybody to use a CF rifle with a scope. Otherwise, we'd be living in the past with any muzzleloader.
I guess we don't need a muzzy, or bow season anymore. You seen my box of .338 magnums? Why use a .338 Win Mag when you can us a Barrett .50 for all your hunting pleasures!!! |
Originally Posted by rafsob
(Post 4234567)
Why use a .338 Win Mag when you can us a Barrett .50 for all your hunting pleasures!!! |
Apparently OldBob doesn't realize that some of our muzzleloaders will not shoot "modern" jacketed bullets accurately. And modern centerfire rifles delivering enormous amounts of energy are not necessary. It's all about bullet (or ball) placement.
|
He has every right to shoot what he wants and so do you. Not sure why you guys argue about your rights?? He has his opinions and so do you guys.
|
Yeah but Grouse, having and expressing an opinion is one thing. Calling all hunters that use a PRB unethical is another thing entirely. He needs to step away from the soapbox he has risen himself upon before he gets knocked off of it.
|
He didn't choose what he uses. He attacked those using traditional gear. Big difference.
|
Another point is that he is a new member and it is obvious that he joined the forum with an agenda to attack round ball shooters.
|
Maybe Marty has witnessed roundball shooters being unethical? Not trying to stickup for him thou, for he never mentioned anything like that in his excuse.
I would believe most-everyone here has a problem with a traditionalist using a roundball that's willing to take risky shots. I may have harvested this centerfire hunting season, had I shot my .300WSM semi-auto repeatedly at the ass-end of a doe, no more than 30 yards away. But I refused to do it (outside of a kill zone) and I hate to hear about roundball shooters who are willing to take a wound shot, instead of a kill shot. |
As every one of us has posted "know and shoot within the limitations of yourself and your equipment"! That is the definition of ethical hunting in my book.
|
I've notice those who use big magnums are more willing to take risky shots way more than a PRB user.
|
Originally Posted by super_hunt54
(Post 4234641)
Yeah but Grouse, having and expressing an opinion is one thing. Calling all hunters that use a PRB unethical is another thing entirely. He needs to step away from the soapbox he has risen himself upon before he gets knocked off of it.
|
Cmon Tom. You always say that, even when it's about yourself. Someone doesn't have to use the word unethical to know that's what they mean.
If he thought a PRB was ethical he wouldn't say things like this: "At some point, I think we have to ask ourselves if our slavish devotion to some aspect of outdated technology is diminishing our sport, and ourselves." |
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234670)
Cmon Tom. You always say that, even when it's about yourself. Someone doesn't have to use the word unethical to know that's what they mean.
If he thought a PRB was ethical he wouldn't say things like this: "At some point, I think we have to ask ourselves if our slavish devotion to some aspect of outdated technology is diminishing our sport, and ourselves." |
Well, i'm sure you'll agree that he doesn't think anybody should use the old technology?
How do we define unethical? Wouldn't it be using a method that has a high degree of failure? At least in the mind of the poster. That seems to be the point he's trying to get across. A lot of hunters feel that way, so he's not alone. I just wonder if these opinions are from experience, or just passed on from what they hear others say? Who might also be passing on what they hear. |
Look up some of his other posts Tom. He flat out calls the use of PRB's unethical. Ever since he joined he has been on a soap box against the use of PRB's. As I said earlier, I don't use them anymore myself, but as long as people use them within their range and shot placement limitations, I see no reason NOT to use them as they are quite effective when used properly. Going by his logic from other posts, one shouldn't hunt with anything less than the latest greatest laser cannon. There is ALWAYS something more technologically advanced out there to use for hunting but that in no way means something less advanced is unethical. It really doesn't mean that the advanced products are any more ethical to use either. Everything needs to be used within it's limitations as well as the hunters limitations or it then becomes unethical.
|
I believe most that have a bad impression of PRB either have not shot enough of them to understand them or have messed with light loads or small calibers.
40 and 45 are good squirrel guns and a 50 is only slightly better; a 54 is the longest range flattest shooting and is capable of dropping an elk in his tracks I have done it most of the deer and bear I have shot were with a 54 and none of them went 100 yds. and only two went over 35 yds. Sure you need to hit the heart lung area and you need to hit there with a bow or a cartridge gun also. I have had 58 and 62 calibers and somebody else can have them, I can take deer out to 180 yds. with a 54 and the rainbow trajectory of the bigger calibers does not impress me. A lot of the guns I built were percussion but I did build a half dozen flint locks. I used 120 to 130 grains of black or RS and as a rule it stopped deer and black bear better than most bullets on the market today the exceptions to this is a properly loaded Lehigh brass bullet and certain Barns and Gold Dot or Deep Curl bullets. I shot PRB from 1962 and still do sometimes, I am sorry for being so long winded but having people generalize and say they don't work when I know better gets old. |
Originally Posted by super_hunt54
(Post 4234675)
Look up some of his other posts Tom. He flat out calls the use of PRB's unethical. Ever since he joined he has been on a soap box against the use of PRB's. As I said earlier, I don't use them anymore myself, but as long as people use them within their range and shot placement limitations, I see no reason NOT to use them as they are quite effective when used properly. Going by his logic from other posts, one shouldn't hunt with anything less than the latest greatest laser cannon. There is ALWAYS something more technologically advanced out there to use for hunting but that in no way means something less advanced is unethical. It really doesn't mean that the advanced products are any more ethical to use either. Everything needs to be used within it's limitations as well as the hunters limitations or it then becomes unethical.
|
Originally Posted by lemoyne
(Post 4234684)
I believe most that have a bad impression of PRB either have not shot enough of them to understand them or have messed with light loads or small calibers.
40 and 45 are good squirrel guns and a 50 is only slightly better; a 54 is the longest range flattest shooting and is capable of dropping an elk in his tracks I have done it most of the deer and bear I have shot were with a 54 and none of them went 100 yds. and only two went over 35 yds. Sure you need to hit the heart lung area and you need to hit there with a bow or a cartridge gun also. I have had 58 and 62 calibers and somebody else can have them, I can take deer out to 180 yds. with a 54 and the rainbow trajectory of the bigger calibers does not impress me. A lot of the guns I built were percussion but I did build a half dozen flint locks. I used 120 to 130 grains of black or RS and as a rule it stopped deer and black bear better than most bullets on the market today the exceptions to this is a properly loaded Lehigh brass bullet and certain Barns and Gold Dot or Deep Curl bullets. I shot PRB from 1962 and still do sometimes, I am sorry for being so long winded but having people generalize and say they don't work when I know better gets old. |
Originally Posted by lemoyne
(Post 4234684)
I believe most that have a bad impression of PRB either have not shot enough of them to understand them or have messed with light loads or small calibers.
40 and 45 are good squirrel guns and a 50 is only slightly better; a 54 is the longest range flattest shooting and is capable of dropping an elk in his tracks I have done it most of the deer and bear I have shot were with a 54 and none of them went 100 yds. and only two went over 35 yds. Sure you need to hit the heart lung area and you need to hit there with a bow or a cartridge gun also. I have had 58 and 62 calibers and somebody else can have them, I can take deer out to 180 yds. with a 54 and the rainbow trajectory of the bigger calibers does not impress me. A lot of the guns I built were percussion but I did build a half dozen flint locks. I used 120 to 130 grains of black or RS and as a rule it stopped deer and black bear better than most bullets on the market today the exceptions to this is a properly loaded Lehigh brass bullet and certain Barns and Gold Dot or Deep Curl bullets. I shot PRB from 1962 and still do sometimes, I am sorry for being so long winded but having people generalize and say they don't work when I know better gets old. I'll be using a .50 PRB for elk in the fall, and maybe bear too. I have no worries that it won't work. Using open sights will keep most guys in PRB range. I'm not limited by the PRB. I'm limited by the sights. It's a no fail system, unless you have the eyes for long open sights. Not a peep. Open sights. Then you should think of another round. |
My error
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234473)
I have no problem with you Bob. Did we argue in the past? I hold no grudges, so I forget fast.
You can post your opinion all you want, but expect me to respond if you tell me what i'm doing isn't humane for the game. If you knew me well you'd know how concerned I am that the animal doesn't suffer. That's why I always hunt close, and why i'm so picky about the shots I take. I agree a PRB is a bad choice for long shots. For close shots it's very effective. My guns have deep rifling, and a slow twist made for a PRB. They're very accurate at my range. This was merely an attempt at courtesy on my part. On the internet, too many people feel they had been given a license to be rude. I did not want to be one of those, so I erred on the side of being polite. No harm. OldBob |
Inappropriate bullets
Originally Posted by super_hunt54
(Post 4234488)
Bob, I really wish you would kinda back up a little bit on your campaign for everyone to stop using PRB's. Many on here like to use them and do so with extreme effectiveness. Pete is one of them. I myself used them back in the dark ages when I was young and seriously into black powder shooting. I don't now mainly because I am getting into the more modern aspects of the sport in my old age. That and I don't have a BP rifle that is suitable for PRB. My Hawk is 1:28 twist and just doesn't like shooting them worth diddly. Maybe one day I will get back into them but my "one days" are getting shorter daily. They just don't trip me trigger like they used to. They are an effective bullet when used properly just like EVERY other means of hunting out there. No matter what bullet or platform one chooses to hunt with, they have to know their limitations. Period. Just like CF rifles, there are better bullets, but that doesn't mean that the PRB is useless or ineffective or unethical. There are tons better bullets than cup and core bullets for CF rifles yet I don't see yo on a campaign to stop the use of them. Just because something may or may not be better doesn't mean that the other thing is useless and unethical.
I don't think seasonal help, particularly in the big box stores, knows enough to be giving advice. I view game commissions as being equally competent. OldBob |
No drugs
Originally Posted by rafsob
(Post 4234559)
?????????????????????????? Man, what were you smoking when you wrote this?????
In accordance with my beliefs, I abstain from mind-altering substances. I would not make this a blanket recommendation for everyone, but you might want to consider it. The clarity of mind that it would give you would allow your native talents and abilities to come forth. You could be making posts with a lot of information, or witty posts, rather than the embarrassingly feeble personal attacks we have witnessed here. OldBob |
.338
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234569)
Yes, of course. What was I thinking?
Its funny that this caliber should be in this conversation. I wanted one of those since they came out in, what was it, 1958? Never got one, and now I never will. But reading Elmer Keith's writings gave me the idea that you might have to go that much bigger than 30-06 to see an increase in terminal effect. The problem with big bores is the opposite of the smaller calibers. With the smaller ones, you have to select a bullet that is sufficiently tough. With the big bores, you have to look for bullets that are "soft" enough for humane kills. This was probably the beginning of my attention to selecting the most appropriate bullet. OldBob |
Maybe
Originally Posted by bronko22000
(Post 4234604)
Apparently OldBob doesn't realize that some of our muzzleloaders will not shoot "modern" jacketed bullets accurately. And modern centerfire rifles delivering enormous amounts of energy are not necessary. It's all about bullet (or ball) placement.
I suspect that the two bullets that Ron reported on might stabilize out of a 1-60 twist, given a max load. The Hornady appears to be the shorter of the two, and is certainly cheaper. OldBob |
It's not just the twist, but the depth of the rifling too.
|
Honesty compels
Originally Posted by super_hunt54
(Post 4234641)
Yeah but Grouse, having and expressing an opinion is one thing. Calling all hunters that use a PRB unethical is another thing entirely. He needs to step away from the soapbox he has risen himself upon before he gets knocked off of it.
In the interest of accuracy, I will own up to the fact that I did say, and believe, that the use of a PRB under .62 (or so) is unethical. Supporting that, many years ago I tried a .575 pure lead ball out of a 20 gauge shotgun. Firing into a bundle of newsprint, the channel was no different than a load using a .598 WW ball. I don't think a nondeforming RB is a good tool for the job. Maybe if its big. I never hunted with either one. You want to knock me off of some imaginary soapbox? I think you're losing your objectivity. OldBob |
Why do you think a PRB is non deforming?
You never hunted with a PRB? What are you basing your opinions on? |
What tradititional?!
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234642)
He didn't choose what he uses. He attacked those using traditional gear. Big difference.
The U.S. Army abandoned the roundball over 200 years ago. The fact that they spec'ed the 1803 Harper's Ferry with a 1-49 twist points to the fact that they were thinking "conical". I think the account of Sgt. Murphy's encounter with British General Fraser was part of the decision. OldBob |
you do know that the Hawken rifle back in the original days used 1:48 twist and conical was not even close to their thinking.
|
Originally Posted by OldBob47
(Post 4234741)
Pete,
The U.S. Army abandoned the roundball over 200 years ago. The fact that they spec'ed the 1803 Harper's Ferry with a 1-49 twist points to the fact that they were thinking "conical". I think the account of Sgt. Murphy's encounter with British General Fraser was part of the decision. OldBob Hunting is not war. Why not use a bazooka for your hunting? It's what the military uses. |
Ah, no
Originally Posted by flounder33
(Post 4234646)
Another point is that he is a new member and it is obvious that he joined the forum with an agenda to attack round ball shooters.
I did not come here to attack roundball shooters. I came here to get the most up-to-date information on muzzleloading as it is today. What I stumbled upon was a discussion of a projectile that is a relic from the days of the smoothbore. I find that incredible! Surely most of us have access to the ballistic data that clearly illustrates the limitations of the PRB. Is there any projectile that is worse? I can't find one. So, unless you live and hunt in one of those states that still mandates the PRB, why not move on, as many of you have? OldBob |
Originally Posted by OldBob47
(Post 4234745)
flounder33,
I did not come here to attack roundball shooters. I came here to get the most up-to-date information on muzzleloading as it is today. What I stumbled upon was a discussion of a projectile that is a relic from the days of the smoothbore. I find that incredible! Surely most of us have access to the ballistic data that clearly illustrates the limitations of the PRB. Is there any projectile that is worse? I can't find one. So, unless you live and hunt in one of those states that still mandates the PRB, why not move on, as many of you have? OldBob How is that possible with such a bad bullet that your ballistics chart shows? How can the relic round ball kill anything bigger than a chipmunk? Explain please? |
felt wad?
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234734)
It's not just the twist, but the depth of the rifling too.
Don't know. Someone has to have the components to test this. We're running out of weather, though. OldBob |
As a rule conicals don't do well in deep rifling made for a PRB.
A PRB can work in shallow rifling if it's not pushed too fast. So, from my testing it does matter somewhat. |
Newsprint
Originally Posted by Muley Hunter
(Post 4234739)
Why do you think a PRB is non deforming?
You never hunted with a PRB? What are you basing your opinions on? I used to get bundles of newspapers that were going to be recycled. Eventually they were, missing the material from the holes. I shot them dry, because a thoroughly wetted bundle is just a mess, and a solid block of ice if you want to do testing in the winter. Its a little more abusive to the bullets, but that would do more to expand/deform the PRB. Cow heads are also a good medium, but that's another story. OldBob |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:17 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.